http://www.jewishworldreview.com --
PEOPLE say there are a lot of kooks on the Internet, but I don't know. The anti-abortion Web site Nuremberg Files is an excellent concept (http://lancasterlife.com/NurembergFiles). It provides a list of abortionists in anticipation of "the day when these people will be charged in PERFECTLY LEGAL COURTS once the tide of this nation's opinion turns against the wanton slaughter of God's children (as it surely will)."

This is such a great idea, I've been lost in a reverie drafting my own Nuremberg list, and abortion is just the beginning. This week I'm concentrating on the Nuremberg files for big tax-and-spenders.

That the Web site envisions trials clearly excludes the possibility of summary execution. Still, its creators were sued and ordered to pay $109 million in damages to Planned Parenthood and four abortionists who claimed they felt threatened by the pro-lifers' free speech.

The $109 million fine on free speech was eventually overturned on appeal. In a groundbreaking ruling, the appeals court found that -- not just go-go dancers -- but "words are protected by the First Amendment."
The court was apparently unaware of the abortion exception to the Flynt Amendment. As Justice Antonin Scalia has explained it, abortion operates as an "ad hoc nullification machine" in which "no legal rule or doctrine is safe" when faced with an abortion regulation.

But the appeals court was driving blind. It cited only the Constitution -- flagrantly ignoring the pocket parts to the First Amendment added by the ACLU, Planned Parenthood and The New York Times.

Needless to say, the Times was indignant. It's one thing to publish classified Pentagon documents or graphic photos of sodomic acts involving bullwhips. It's something else entirely when a pro-life Christian opens his trap.

The Times editorialized that the decision in the free speech case should motivate the Bush administration to "crack down" on the anti-abortion movement. In their darkest fantasies, this is what liberals claim McCarthyism was. Pro-lifers can't have their speech squelched, so the Times at least wants them investigated.

In addition to its heavy-breathing editorial, the Times ran an earnest column by one of the abortionists who had sued the pro-life Web site. "It's too dangerous for me to be in front of a window," the abortionist woefully claimed.

Oh please. More cab drivers are killed every year in New York City than abortionists have been killed in 30 years. It's more dangerous to be a friend of Bill Clinton's than it is to be an abortionist. It's evidently more dangerous to be a witness before the Warren Commission than to be an abortionist.

And an abortionist is certainly safer in front of his window than over a million babies a year are in their mothers' wombs. In the three decades since the Supreme Court invented a constitutional right to abortion, the casualty figures are seven murdered abortionists to 30 million murdered babies.

In court, the abortionist said, his lawyer "eloquently showed the pattern to the jury: poster, murder; poster, murder; poster, murder -- all since 1993." So in the worst period of abortionists being slaughtered, the babies narrowed the gap to a ratio of 7-to-10,000,000.

That 1993 figure is interesting, though. Abortion has been a pretend constitutional right since 1973. But all seven abortionists have been killed only since 1993.

Let's see: What happened around 1993 that might have persuaded some pro-lifers that they couldn't work within the system anymore? For 20 years they had waited, peacefully protesting outside abortion clinics, enacting incremental restrictions on abortion, and voting for Republican presidents.

In the summer of 1992 -- after four new Republican appointments to the Supreme Court -- Roe vs. Wade was reaffirmed. A few years later, the Supreme Court stripped pro-lifers of their right to protest outside abortion clinics.

So what system are pro-lifers supposed to be working within exactly? They are completely disenfranchised. They can't vote, they can't protest, they can't engage in speech without risking a $100 million fine.

Liberals are filled with boundless compassion for drooling, lumpen predators rioting in Cincinnati. They empathize with the Red Chinese. They feel the pain of every murderous dictator and serial killer to come down the pike. They do it for sport. But people who love babies -- oh no! No sir.

At the opening of the Pope John Paul II Cultural Center in Washington, D.C., last month, President George Bush praised the pope for speaking for the unborn, unleashing a wild standing ovation. According to published reports: "(a)bout the only people who did not rise or even applaud were Sen. Teddy Kennedy and his niece, Caroline Kennedy Schlossberg."

You won't see a scene like that again until Judgment Day. The Nuremberg files will come in
handy.

04/12/01: Tell him there's a stopover in Bangkok03/29/01: Racial profiling in university admissions03/29/01: Bizarre political sect ousted from nomination process03/22/01:
The trillion-dollar loophole in 'campaign finance reform'03/15/01: The liar is gone but the lying continues03/08/01: More facts, fewer liberals03/01/01: Mary Jo White-wash02/22/01: How to talk to a liberal02/15/01: Bill Clinton does the Harlem shuffle02/08/01: Eight more Clarence Thomases02/01/01: This just in: Price controls cause shortages01/25/01: People United for Swindles and Hucksterism01/18/01: Ashcroft and the blowhard discuss desegregation
01/11/01: TWO WEEKS TILL INDICTMENT!01/04/01: Liberal pimps for Clintonism01/02/01: Kwanzaa: Holiday from the FBI12/28/00: If Americans support abortion, let's vote12/26/00: Gore, him and her12/21/00: Channeling Jackie O12/14/00: My Court is bigger than your Court12/11/00: HANG IN THERE, AL!12/07/00: National Lampoon's Florida Supreme Court Vacation12/04/00: It's past time for GOPers to quit being good at losing11/30/00: Things only a Dem will say with a straight face11/27/00: Certify the electors, then the judges11/23/00: Kangaroo coup11/20/00: This is what the Electoral College is supposed to prevent11/16/00: The liar next time11/09/00: JUST GO!11/06/00: Hail Mary past11/02/00: As the nose grows: The scripture according to Gore
10/30/00: Clinton sure can pick 'em10/26/00: Gore's 'Nam flashbacks10/23/00: Courting George Orwell10/20/00: The three faces of Al10/17/00: Must Christian conservatives be fascists?10/13/00: Oil good; Dems bad10/10/00: Al Gore: Serial fibber10/06/00: Sigh of the crook10/03/00: So who's the 'dumb guy' now?09/29/00: Don't do drug legalization09/26/00: I'd burn down my neighbor's house09/22/00: Democrats worship the money shot09/19/00: Other film footage we'd like to see09/15/00: Bush can name the **^%*09/12/00: The Supreme Court ratchet09/08/00: Our mistake -- keep polluting09/05/00: Bubba protects and serves09/01/00: AlGore's 'going out of business!' tax plan08/29/00: Bush's compassionate conservatism08/25/00: Space alien tells funny jokes in bathtub08/22/00: Dems view world only in black and white, not in color08/18/00: Another Damascus Road conversion08/15/00: The viagra cotillion08/11/00: The hand-wringing Hamlet from Hartford08/07/00: The Democratic party's white face08/04/00: Hillary's potty mouth08/01/00: The hole in the story07/28/00: Cheney's detractors can't get their story straight07/25/00: AlGore: Elmer Blandry07/21/00: The tyranny of non-objectivity07/18/00: The state's religion07/14/00: Reform it back07/11/00: Keating for veep07/07/00: Gore invented 'Clueless'07/04/00: The stupidity litmus test 06/30/00: O.J. was 'proved innocent' too06/27/00: The last guys 'proved innocent' 06/23/00: Serious Republican candidates don't get serious press 06/19/00: They weren't overzealous this time 06/16/00: Evolution of the strumpet06/13/00: Actual journalistic malpractice 06/09/00: I did not have sexual relations with that ... man! 06/06/00: IRS turns Bubba's screw05/30/00: Too corrupt to be an Arkansas lawyer 05/26/00: Choose liberalism 05/24/00: Violence against coherence 05/22/00: Developmentally disabled Republicans 05/16/00: For womb the bell tolls 05/12/00: Asylum from Georgetown 05/10/00: The truth is out there, even for the clueless 05/08/00: Barbie is a liberal Democrat 05/02/00: Moving the goalpost 04/28/00: The bastardization of justice 04/25/00: How Monica Lewinsky saved the constitution 04/24/00: It's sunny today, so we need gun control 04/19/00: No shadow of a doubt -- liberal women are worthless 04/14/00:
It takes a Communist dictator to raise a child 04/11/00: The verdict is in on Hillary 04/07/00: Vast Concoctions III 04/04/00: 'Horrifying' free speech in New York 03/31/00: Check-Off Box For Pimp Suits03/28/00: All the news that fits -- we print! 03/24/00: Net losses all around 03/20/00: To protect, serve --- and be spat on 03/16/00: Thank Heaven for the consigliere 03/13/00: Vast concoctions II 03/09/00: The bluebloods voted against you 03/07/00: The Tower of Babble 03/03/00: Vast concoction 03/02/00: Hillary's sartorial lies 02/28/00: You have to break a few eggs to make a joke 02/22/00: I've seen enough killing to support abortion02/18/00: A liberal lynching 02/15/00: McCain and the flag 02/11/00: The Shakedown Express02/08/00: To mock a mockingbird 02/05/00: Summing up Campaign 2000: 'Oh, puh-leeze!'02/01/00: A Confederacy of Dunces01/28/00: Dollar Bill's racist smear 01/24/00: How high is your freedom quotient? 01/21/00: Numismadness 01/18/00: How dare you attack my wife! 01/14/00: The Gore Buggernaut 01/10/00: The paradox of discrimination law